The unclaimed tokens were initially designated for the HodlerDrop, so it makes sense to redistribute them to active participants rather than reallocating them elsewhere. Many active participants have already experienced significant dilution of their holdings during the migration. This redistribution would help offset that effect and support those who actively engaged with the platform.
Rationale
This proposal aligns with Lisk DAOâs mission to support and reward active community members. By redistributing the unclaimed tokens, we incentivize engagement and participation. Additionally, this ensures that tokens originally set aside for the community stay within the community, promoting fairness and inclusivity in line with the DAOâs values.
Action Plan
Snapshot and Assessment
Determine the final amount of unclaimed tokens after the set claim period.
Assess the total distribution to HodlerDrop participants.
Proportional Redistribution
Redistribute the remaining LSK tokens in the same ratio as already claimed (e.g. 2M LSK distributed, 1M LSK left, for each 6,250 LSK a user already claimed, they can claim another 3,125 LSK), if the following conditions are applied:
50% redistribution to the users who stake the same amount for 3 months (e.g. user is eligible for 3,125 LSK, if they stake 3,125 LSK for 3 months they receive 50% of the LSK amount);
50% redistribution to the users who stake the same amount for 6 months (e.g. user is eligible for 3,125, if they stake 3,125 for 6 months they receive 50% of the LSK amount);
Any remaining amount goes into the Ecosystem Fund.
Execution and Transparency
Provide a transparent report detailing the redistribution process to ensure the community can verify the amounts received.
Allocate development resources to implement and execute the redistribution via smart contracts, if applicable.
Should the unclaimed hodlerdrop tokens be redistributed proportionally among participants who have already claimed their tokens?
Yes: Redistribute the unclaimed tokens proportionally among those who have already claimed.
No: Do not redistribute the unclaimed tokens among the claimants.
Abstain: No opinion or preference on the redistribution of unclaimed tokens.
On one hand, I understand your position, but please read my proposal again carefully. Why was it necessary to dilute the shares of all old holders by 50%? If that hadnât happened, there wouldnât be any questions at all. Thatâs why I believe we shouldnât distort reality or ignore what happened during the migrationâspecifically, the 50% dilution (or even more if the community decides not to burn the 100M). As a result, I consider it well-deserved to reward the true active [1] community that supported you in that moment, not just with words but with tokens in their wallets. And this community has still kept their tokens locked.
Iâm not arguing the original community members should be rewarded or not.
I think the question is which direction will benefit the original members.
Concretely,
Using the remaining tokens to expand the community
Using the remaining tokens to further reward the original community
In the case 1, there are potential to create token demand further, so even if there is no increase in number of tokens for original members, the total value will increase
In the case 2, original members will increase the total value, but it will not create further demands.
If we look at this from the point of view of original members, short term case 2 seems to be more beneficial but case 1 has higher potential.
Additionally, case 2 will align better with other efforts from airdrop etc.
For overall strategy, it looks to be that even for original community members, case 2 is more beneficial.
My argument is simple: 15 million tokens were minted for the first case, and 3 million for the second. I suggested distributing them as LayerZero has done, which is fair.
However, you propose repeating the approach used during the migrationâusing participantsâ funds to âbenefitâ the participants themselves. During the migration, you focused on expansion, which is good, but it was done at the expense of the holders, diluting their shares, which is not fair. Despite the changing market conditions, it did not allow you to mint new tokens. For example, Ethereum didnât mint any tokens despite being in the same conditions. Moreover, the fund still holds ~100mln $.
Thatâs why I believe itâs fair to reward the active community. Especially since Iâm not asking for new tokens to be allocated from the DAO but simply to redistribute the tokens that were minted for this exact purpose.
I agree. The airdrop had the purpose to hodl. People who continue to hodl should get the remaining amount. With the new additions it now rewards people to hold for another 3 and 6 months.
Yes but what about people who havenât claimed yet? Wouldnât it be better to take this rewards for another airdrop so that newcomers and potentially those who havenât claimed will have opportunity to claim this bonus next time?
Why 100% unclaimed tokens should go straight to old users, long time holders? How it will improve community?
Meaby it will be better to give them 50% of the total amount unclaimed and keep another 50% for next airdrop? This way nobody will be aggrieved.
We have debated the proposal in detail within the Lisk team and have again concluded to vote âAbstainâ on the proposal with the Lisk Team Delegate. While we have several reservations with the proposal as explained below, we want to ensure that the proposal threshold is reached considering the proposal received support by the vast majority of the community.
Just for context again, the Holderdrop was giving users up to 10 % of their migrated tokens (but at most 25,000 LSK) in order to incentivize users
not to sell the token before the migration to an L2 and the migration of LSK to an ERC20 token,
to start using the Lisk L2 by bridging ETH for fees,
becoming active in the Lisk DAO by delegating their tokens,
to stay loyal to Lisk going forward by staking 50 % of the migrated tokens (for 1 or 6 months).
Further note that 15m LSK of the newly minted tokens are dedicated to airdrops of which 3m LSK were sent to the Hodlerdrop contract. Any remaining funds from the Hodlerdrop will be returned to the airdrop wallet after the end of the 6 month airdrop period as hardcoded in the smart contract. So we never exclusively allocated 3m LSK to the Hodlerdrop, but were expecting a large part of these funds not be claimed so that instead they can be used for future airdrops. In particular, a âRedistribution of Unclaimed Hodlerdrop Tokensâ will mean that funds from the airdrop wallet will be used that are then not available for other airdrops.
Overall, our main concerns with the proposal are:
The staking requirement is too easy to satisfy. For the Hodlerdrop someone migrating 10,000 LSK had to stake 5,000 LSK for 6 months to satisfy the stricter staking condition for the maximum airdrop amount of 1,000 LSK. The new staking condition only requires to stake the amount that a user receives as airdrop (e.g., stake 500 LSK for 6 months for 500 airdrop).
The proposal states to âincentivize engagement and participationâ, but we donât see a connection to how this is done.
The proposal rewards those who were LSK token holders 6 months ago (again) and lets them claim an airdrop even if they sold the majority of their holdings by now. At the same time new token holders do not have a chance to benefit from this airdrop.
We think it is better to use the airdrop funds in a way to increase our user base, onchain activity, TVL and app usage as is the aim of the Userdrop.
@Filmmaniak While some may see my proposal as overly ambitious, it has received significant support from the community, including Max and Oliver. Perhaps youâre looking at this from a different perspective, donât you think? And by the way, if youâre against it, you should vote against it, but even so, the âagainstâ column shows 0 voting powerâŚ
@Lisk_Team For me, it was very important that the quorum was reached even without the potential participation of the Lisk team. The teamâs comments are based solely on the fact (and Iâm not saying theyâre wrong) that the migration has already taken place, while what happened during and before the migration is being overlooked.
One recurring issue with Lisk is the lack of loyalty to long-time participants, who often feel undervalued and leave as a result. Without addressing this, the communityâs core will continue to shift, preventing the project from building a stable, long-term foundation. My proposal seeks to address this by acknowledging and rewarding those who contribute to the ecosystem.
Yes, attracting new blood is very important, and I agree with most of the teamâs arguments. However, I want to draw attention to this: a project that does not value its past is unlikely to have a future. Therefore, I propose that we start by at least acknowledging the community that truly participates in the development of the ecosystem. I think thatâs why Max and Oliver voted âForâ - to show they understand my point.
Thanks to everyone who voted. It is especially important to me that my vision is supported by the community not just in words, but in actions (votes).
The following reflects the views of L2BEATâs governance team, composed of @krst and @Sinkas, and itâs based on the combined research, fact-checking, and ideation of the two.
Weâre voting FOR the proposal.
Although we initially voted against the proposal in its first iteration, there have been some things that led us to change our mind.
The proposed changes by @maxkordek are being incorporated into the proposal, which help us reward people that are aligned with Lisk.
The clarification by @grumlin that the redistribution will happen after 6 months, which gives ample time to people who havenât claimed their airdrop yet to do so.
Not exactly. The redistribution timeline hasnât been specified (the team needs to prepare a new contract that will account for everything), but it has been stated that it will take place once the 6-month period allocated for claiming the rewards ends. I think the new smart contract will be deployed 2-3 months after the claim period concludes, and there are almost 20 days left until the end of the claim period.
